MARCH 2019

Bridging
the Gap:
Mapping Gender
Data Availability
in Africa
KEY FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Overview
Bridging the Gap: Mapping Gender Data Availability in Africa contributes to international
efforts to understand, identify, and respond to the ongoing challenge of producing
policy-relevant data about the lives of women and girls. This work builds upon Data2X’s
Mapping Gender Data Gaps report, published in 2014, which launched efforts to find and
test innovative solutions to fill gender data gaps.

In the five years since the Mapping Gender Data Gaps report was published, the data
landscape has expanded and gender data has received more attention. The indicator
framework of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has increased demand for
disaggregated data that can help decision makers and implementers get closer to the
impact they are hoping to achieve. This is underpinned by the promise of the 2030
Agenda to “leave no one behind,” which has renewed a focus on groups that are
systematically disadvantaged and has pushed the boundaries of global expectations for
what data can and should be able to tell us about the lives of women and girls.

Despite the expanding scope and demand for better Fig. 1: The 15 sub-Saharan African countries
in this study
data, data availability has not kept pace evenly across
regions. Bridging the Gap is a regional deep dive
assessing availability of data about women and girls in
15 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. These 15 countries
represent 60 percent of the population of sub-
Saharan Africa and a range of income levels.

Through this project, we set out to answer the

following questions:

§§ Which domains of women’s and girls’ lives

(health, education, economic opportunities,
political participation, human security,
environment) do we understand well thanks to existing data, and which domains
remain unclear because of a lack of or poor quality data?

§§ When data exist, where do they come from (sources) and where can they be found
in international and national databases? What lessons can we glean from these
patterns of availability?

§§ What can we learn from the 15 countries about the most effective ways to close
systemic gender data gaps?
 Approach
To answer these questions, we assembled a list of 104 gender-relevant indicators
covering six domains: economic opportunities, health, education, human security,
political participation and the environment.
Fig. 2: Gender-relevant indicators by domain

Education
22
Human
Health 32 104 12 Security
GENDER-RELEVANT
INDICATORS

7 Political
Participation
8
Economic 23 Environment
Opportunities

These indicators include 68 gender-relevant SDG indicators and 36 non-SDG indicators

from other international sources. This combination of SDG and non-SDG indicators, if
produced regularly and to a high standard, would provide a portion of the information
we need to be able to monitor and deliver on current commitments for women and
girls. Much more work needs to be done to design methodology for Tier III indicators
and other measures.
Fig. 3: Sources of the gender-relevant indicators examined in this study

Non-SDG
supplemental SDG indicators that
indicators 9 are gender-specificas
suggested by
UN Women
32 identified byUN Women

27 104
GENDER-RELEVANT
Non-SDG INDICATORS
indicators from
the UN Statistics
SDG indicators that can
Division Minimum
be sex-disaggregated as
Set of Gender 36 identified by Open Data Watch
Indicators

To understand where the existing data comes from we looked in both international and
national databases. We assessed data in four ways:

Availability examined whether Adherence to standards

the 104 indicators were noted whether indicators were
AVAILABILITY recorded at all in any form being produced according to
ADHERENCE TO
over the period 2010 to 2018. STANDARDS international standards.

Disaggregation assessed Timeliness checked how

if the existing indicators recently the indicators had
were sex-disaggregated and TIMELINESS been produced and if they
DISAGGREGATION
whether they reported against had a history of appearing
additional disaggregations such frequently.
as geographic location, age,
income level, or disability status.
We dug deep into sources of the data by examining their metadata and recording their
microdata sources - the specific surveys, censuses, and administrative data sources used
for calculating the indicators. This allowed us to establish the trends in data production,
learn from the areas where some countries are doing well and assess whether their
success is replicable, and pinpoint strategic opportunities to improve gender data
collection for these indicators.

Key Findings: Gender indicators in

international and national databases
Data exist for 52 percent of the gender indicators in both
international and national databases; however, 48 percent lack
AVAILABILITY ADHERENCE TO sex-disaggregation or are missing entirely.
STANDARDS

Fig. 4: Gender-relevant indicators available at the national and international level

Gender-related
36% indicators with
no data
26%

Gender-related
13% 22%
NATIONAL INTERNATIONAL
DATABASES indicators with data,but DATABASES
not sex-disaggregated

52%
52% Gender-related
indicators with
sex-disaggregated data

National databases have a higher proportion of gender indicators with no data than
international databases and are more likely to report on indicators that do not exactly
conform to international standards. International databases have more data that
adheres to standards but report on a more restricted set of indicators. This suggests
that while national databases have a distance to travel in terms of adhering to standards,
international databases could also learn from in-country experience to report proxy
measures for a wider set of indicators. At both levels, there is still very basic work to do
on nearly half of the indicators, to produce them in a sex-disaggregated form, or indeed
at all.

Only 44 percent of indicators are produced with complete

disaggregation at the international level, and just 32 percent are
DISAGGREGATION
produced with complete disaggregation at the national level.

Sex-disaggregation is the first basic level of disaggregation required to tell us about

the lives of women and men, girls and boys. But recognizing that women and girls
are not a homogenous group, additional disaggregations are required to document
different outcomes for women and girls in rural and urban settings, young and old,
higher and lower income, and across the spectrum of disability status and racial
and ethnic groups. Working towards more complete disaggregation is an important
challenge for data producers to address.
 The health domain has the highest number of sex-disaggregated
indicators (27) available at the international level. No indicator in the
environmental domain has sex-disaggregated data at the international
DISAGGREGATION
level. Data availability at the national level is higher across domains than
at international level.

Fig. 5: Availability of sex-disaggregated data by domain

National Economic Education

International Opportunities 23 22
Total 22 22
19 18

Environment 850 Health

27 31 32
6
7 6
12 7
12

Human Political
Security Participation

One-third of indicators with gender data in national databases have

available observations within the last three years, with the largest share
TIMELINESS
occurring in 2016, but two-thirds are four years old or older, with 17 percent
last published in 2010 or 2011.

Fig. 6: Most recent year of observation in national databases (%), 2010-2018

30
% of gender-related indicators produced

25
20

15

10

5
0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

The lack of timely data is symptomatic of infrequent data collection and delays in
processing data for publication. In most countries only one or two values are available
for important gender indicators over the nine years covered by the study. Regular
updates and timely release of data are key to planning, monitoring, and decision-
making. More balanced data cycles would enable more efficient production of higher
quality gender data.
 In national databases, Kenya and Lesotho produced the fewest gender
indicators (54), while Ghana produced the highest number (83). However,
AVAILABILITY frequency of gender indicator production is highest in South Africa, where
there was an average of 4.9 observations per indicator, and lowest in Ethiopia,
with only 1.1.
Fig. 7: Production and frequency of genderindicators by country

Production of gender Frequency of indicator

indicators by country production by country

83 54 4.9 1.1

Variations in data availability and capacity to fill gender data gaps shows that countries
make difficult choices in their data production decisions as a result of resource
limitations. These results may reflect a strategic choice by some countries to produce
data more frequently for a more limited number of indicators: South Africa, for example,
has data for only 61 gender indicators but has published them more frequently. Others
may choose wider but less frequent coverage. However, it also seems likely that low
frequencies may result from an inability to sustain statistical programs – an area where
countries and donors need to work together to improve for the future.

Key Findings: Microdata sources

A high proportion of gender-relevant SDG indicators are produced from
internationally-sponsored surveys.

A balanced mix of microdata sources is key to ensuring high-quality and frequent gender
indicators. However, we found that 14 of the 15 countries are heavily dependent on
internationally-sponsored surveys such as MICS and DHS for a large share of their data, in
particular, in health and education. For economic indicators, labor force surveys are the
principal source of data. Each country in the study conducted at least one living standard
study to collect information on household income or consumption and, along with the
population census, to collect data on housing conditions and other assets. The remaining
microdata sources were specialized surveys or administrative records.

Administrative data were underreported, undocumented, and were found to offer

weaker data than what was produced by surveys.

Administrative records have the potential to provide more complete gender data than
surveys and do so at higher frequencies. However, to become useful sources of reliable
statistics, these records need to be well-documented and standardized to facilitate
comparisons between countries and over time. Furthermore, standards for anonymization of
data are needed to permit the open dissemination of administrative records for public use.
Recommendations
1. Prioritize closing gender data gaps. National statistical offices, international custodian
agencies, donors, and technical experts who support statistical development should
work closer together to strengthen the quality of the existing gender data and prioritize
new production to close the gaps.

2. Build towards more complete disaggregation. Multiple disaggregations give us a

clearer picture of the varied experiences and outcomes for women and girls. Tackling
this challenge will necessitate innovation in the years to come that will have wide
reaching benefits not only for gender data but for other fields as well. Countries should
prioritize the disaggregations that are most appropriate in their national context.
Improvements to household surveys that yield increased information for individual
household members by sex would greatly increase their value.

3. Aim for more frequent production of headline indicators and even spread of data
collection across regular intervals. Both this recommendation and recommendation
two above would be enabled by increased attention to strengthening administrative data
sources. Investment in data matching and linking techniques between sources of data
would provide information of a much richer texture than any source alone can provide.
Investigation into the possibilities for new data sources to fill gender data gaps should
also be pursued and supported.

4. Country capacity should be strengthened on availability and frequency. Simply

producing an indicator once is not sufficient to track progress over time. Support for
countries is needed to build capacity to maintain regular data production cycles.

5. Where existing microdata are sufficient to produce sex-disaggregated indicators,

a systematic effort to compile and disseminate disaggregated indicators should be
undertaken.

Next Steps
The accompanying technical report is a summary of the knowledge generated by
the Bridging the Gap study. A number of additional products for the data and policy
communities will be produced, to serve as a basis for discussions on future plans for
filling gender data gaps. These will include:

§§ Individual country assessment reports to be shared with the relevant national

statistical office and other stakeholders;

§§ Summary pages for each of the 68 gender-relevant SDG indicators offering targeted
and specific insights into what should be done to improve data collection and
production for each gender-relevant SDG indicator;

§§ A methodology guide to enable countries not covered in this report to carry out
their own assessment of gender data availability;

§§ Policymaker briefs to outline ways to support data production and encourage its use.
About Data2X
Data2X is a technical and advocacy platform dedicated to improving
the quality, availability, and use of gender data in order to make a
practical difference in the lives of women and girls worldwide. Working
in partnership with multilateral agencies, governments, civil society,
academics, and the private sector, Data2X mobilizes action for and
strengthens production and use of gender data.

About Open Data Watch

Open Data Watch is an international, non-profit organization of data
experts working to bring change to organizations that produce and
manage official statistical data. We support the efforts of national statistical
offices (NSOs), particularly those in low- and middle-income countries,
to improve their data systems and harness the advancements of the data
revolution. Through our policy advice, data support, and monitoring work,
we influence and help both NSOs and other organizations meet the goals
of their national statistical plans and the SDGs.

#BridgetheGap
Find out more at: bit.ly/BridgetheGapReport.